Fiona Goddard, a victim of the grooming gang, has resigned from enquiry panel

[GoldThumb]

https://x.com/fionagoddarduk/status/1980169972413607999?s=46&t=ALGAiHxwK3XXeRoDQylnWA

Sounds like the enquiry is going well 🙄

Lies not pies - those would be hard to stomach!

Jess could do with having both you and me at her disposal!!

Fiona Goddard: My response to Jess Phillips, I don’t know why she is saying my claims are untrue when she knows I have the evidence to prove it

https://x.com/fionagoddarduk/status/1980640890810167362?s=46&t=ALGAiHxwK3XXeRoDQylnWA

After the Jay Report that first listed the figures in the thousands of victims, The Guardian ran this from 2 UCL criminology researchers to offer balm for Uncomfortable Thoughts

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/may/08/asian-sex-gangs-on-street-grooming

At the moment, our nationwide figures on on-street grooming are patchy and incomplete. We need a better, more efficient system of data collection and collation. What's more, these data need to be comparable and consistent across the country and across different agencies involved. For this to happen, we desperately need a clear definition of this crime type, agreed upon and adhered to by all relevant statutory agencies, including the police, children's services and the third sector.

In future, this approach would yield a far more accurate picture of offending and inform more effective and targeted responses.

In the meantime, there are plenty of things to be getting on with that don't depend on offender profiling. The best bits of policing nationwide need to become more widely adopted: innovative anti-exploitation teams, training programmes for frontline officers and brave approaches to covert investigations.

"Brave approaches to covert investigations" suggests hiring a decoy teenage girl or undercover groomer. As to the anti exploitation teams, staff at sexual health clinics were getting girls aged 14 turning up riddled with STDs telling them they'd "slept with" 10 men the night before and they'd assumed they were, in a non judgemental way, exploring their sexuality like they were Anaïs Nin in 1930s Paris and sending them away with condoms that these girls were in no position to compel their rapists to use. Its an overdue reckoning for social workers which must feel shocking for the Graun

https://news.sky.com/story/rochdale-sex-grooming-victims-receive-apology-from-greater-manchester-police-12588452
"...There was similar blindness to the problem in other services. When Sally got pregnant, aged 14, she says the local sexual health clinic knew, adding: "They wouldn't say it was wrong, the only thing they said to me was 'they're not going to marry you'.". ".

Rumours on Twitter are that Jess will be gone tonight.

The point seems to have been over looked that the Government acknowledged that they should not be seen to be running the new inquiry and this role has been passed to a charity. Cant remember the name but Jess Phillips name checked them in the House of Commons.

So what is more disturbing is that a charity set up to support victims of violence has not used the user informed knowledge to get the inquiry underway, but reverted to establishment style organising.

Holding meetings without survivor representatives (the whole point of the new inquiry is to give them a voice)
Shortlisting candidates whose expertise is exactly who survivors said should NOT be in charge of running the inquiry.

The implications seems to be that even in charities the establishment is still in charge.

That's the problem.

So the media is doing its all out lets get somebody (in this instance Jess Philips) and not bothering to understand the problem.

More than a little disturbing that in 2025 if even a so called charity supporting survivors doesn't know or cant be bothered to make sure survivors have an equal part.

(I couldn't hear Jess Philips properly but I think she said the charity is called NWG Network, but may have misheard.)

'More than a little disturbing that in 2025 if even a so called charity supporting survivors doesn't know or cant be bothered to make sure survivors have an equal part.'

It really is. What an utter shit show. I don't understand Jess Phillips is responding in this way, or why she is accusing the three survivors of lying

She will do anything to hold onto her seat.

Entirely agree with her. It emerges that the government want to 'widen the enquiry', which appears to mean avoiding actually investigating this phenomenon and its perpetrators. Bastards! The victims have been called liars again, apparently.

I used to give Jess Phillips the benefit of the doubt as someone who balanced her capacity for self-publicity with a visible desire to use that publicity to advance the protection of women and girls. She has now, very publicly, stepped back from supporting VAWG. I don't accept that she needs to look at the makeup of her constituency. She needs to do what is right.

Shabana Mamood has given a statement to GB news [interesting]
Grooming gangs: Shabana Mahmood tells GB News there's 'no hiding place for predatory monsters' https://share.google/5riUueKtgALyLeyY5

'No hiding place' for grooming gang 'predatory monsters', Shabana Mahmood tells GB News

Metadata

• Author: Christopher Hope
• Category: article
• URL: www.gbnews.com/politics/grooming-gangs-shabana-mahmood-gb-news

## Highlights She says;

Addressing concerns from victims that the inquiry will be a whitewash, Mahmood said: "Firstly, this inquiry is not, and will never be, watered down on my watch.

"Its scope will not change, and nor will its intent. It will be robust and rigorous. It will direct and oversee local investigations, with the power to compel witnesses and summon evidence.

"Secondly, this inquiry will focus on grooming gangs – and that will not change. Thirdly, it will explicitly examine the ethnicity and religion of the offenders."

Well that's putting Jess Phillips back in her box. Which begs the question: Jess Phillips; why.

Also seems to be lack of clarity of the role of the new "independent" inquiry.

If I remember rightly Government initially said should be local inquiries run by local councils etc.. Lots of people (probably without any real expertise but happy to attack Labour) said this was outrageous. The issue was bigger than councils, who any way were often implicated.

So after a lot of negativity towards Labour they agreed a national enquiry, but run independent of Government.

But some of the women who have resigned are saying a national inquire makes it more difficult to investigate particular instances where it may be about race, culture etc..

So not sure who can sort this out.

It is such a huge issue, more than just the ones that get in the news.

Dont think any other political party would do any better.

But then wonder who, even any one could do a proper job.

To tackle the level of abuse of women and girls, but also acknowledge the different circumstances in which it happens.

Not saying Jess Phillips is right usually but she is right in saying you cant treat all victims of abuse as though they have a hive mind, they are each individual.

How are their individual circumstances going to be acknowledged by some cumbersome bureaucratic inquiry.?

Ethnicity data doesn't tell anyone their nationality. Non white doesn't mean non British.

Take it with a pinch of salt, but there is an interesting podcast about the grooming gangs: Anything goes with James English... it's all in line of what has been said there. Makes you wonder...

People wanted a national enquiry, so that people could be compelled to provide evidence, but to retain the narrow scope of grooming gangs.

Edited to add: specifically grooming gangs, and also those who aided in the cover up.

Well maybe it should say Asian/British like the ethnicity forms we have to tick at the doc/dentist. We really need to see who is doing what. These men may be British but they are not mixing with us and keep to their own, only coming into our way of life to take.

Jess Philips seems permanently misguided. I think she struggles to balance a genuine desire to help women and girls against the desire not to be excluded from her 'right on' friends and peers. So women still end up under the bus to protect the feelings of men in dresses, men with brown skin etc because her circle tells her that THEY are even more vulnerable than teenagers in care being raped are.

I thought it was interesting that she seemed outraged that the narrative Oldham was telling HER what to do.

Not the enquiry, but her personally.

So what she’s saying is she personally calls the shots? I might be mistaken, but that was the vibe I was getting, how dare anyone believe that I, the mighty JP, can be told what to do.

I feel exactly the same. I think she is genuine in her anger at misogyny and her desire to make the world a better place for women and girls - it's what her career was before she went into politics. And yet.... She was full on TWAW until about 5 minutes ago, prepared to pretend that she didn't see the need for single sex facilities. And now this.

I understand that she has a very difficult tightrope to navigate, and that she can do more for women and girls as an MP than she could if she lost her seat, but it's very difficult to stomach. Maybe she feels the same

Anyone remember this?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40959387

Tried looking for that but it only brings up interviews with Tommy 10 names and Tristan Tate.

On the ethnicity data would that be as described by the authorities or as they see themselves as. It's, ahem a sort of self id for ethnic identity. These guys see themselves as Pakistani but are overwhelmingly from a very very specific area of Mirpur (which they would call Azad / Liberated Kashmir). What you want to be looking at is the familial or social ties between the men.

Were the men convicted of this in Telford say, related or known associates of the men convicted of this in Rochdale etc. how did the men doing this in Wycombe actuallylearn this

Thee was 1 sikh guy also convicted which contrasts with a huge movement against this in the Sikh community that led to 1 guy actually joining Britain First BC of They're Chatting Up Our Women

A charity is organising it? Why? Surely charities are conflicted by funding requirements? Also they simply don’t have the expertise in organising large national inquiries.

Yeah, I think one thing often missed out is that it's not gangs as normie white Brits would understand the term, it's extended families. That poses different challenges.